Premium Essay

Supreme Court Case: Vernonia School District V. US

Submitted By
Words 539
Pages 3
The second part of questions that are to be answer are, “ What is the Constitutional issue? Why is this case being brought before the supreme court?” The Constitutional issue was whether or not the Vernonia school district was violating the 4th amendment. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The Acton’s filed a lawsuit against the school district board, and stating that it violated the 4th …show more content…
The school district lawyers claimed the school’s random was in the public interest and so schools did have a reason for carrying out these searches. The second section questions that are to be addressed are,” What was the Court’s decision in the case? Who did they rule in favor of? And why? What was the basis or reasoning for the Court’s decision? How did this ruling affect the Constitution and the laws of the United States? In your opinion was the effect positive or negative for the Constitution? Did it change any laws or the Constitution itself?” The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling, argued that the search was reasonable under the 4th amendment. Therefore, this case resulted that public schools can randomly drug test their students and that the policy required by the Vernonia School District did not violate the 4th Amendment. The Court concluded that the school board’s judgement was to protect the public against drug abuse, and in result, it won against an individual's 4th Amendment

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Drug Testing In Schools

...prevented our growth. That issue is drugs. Drugs have caused about 50,000 deaths in America from 2012-2013. Now they have began to infest the school systems. Schools have started to issue random drug tests and searches on their students to keep them safe. Public Schools should be allowed to administer drug tests and searches on students who...

Words: 1541 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

The Fourth Amendment

...place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This amendment basically states that we as Americans have to right to be secure as people, in our houses, and within our own private documents. It also protects us against unjust and unfair searches and seizures of our own private possessions. It also states that no warrant to allow these actions will be given unless there is probable cause that is backed up by oath or confirmation, specifically stating what is to be searched, or seized. VERNONIA SCHOOL DISTRICT 47J, PETITIONER v. WAYNE ACTON This was a case between a school district versus a student athlete who refused to take a mandatory drug test imposed on the athletes by the district. The issue started when school officials started noticing more and more students using drugs, and acting out in class, along with delinquent behavior. They began to glamorize drugs, and often boast about using them. Until finally the school realized that the interscholastic athletics were in a complete state of rebellion. They believed that the use of drugs was in turn, the source of the problem that was occurring. They decided that the athletes were a main source of where the drugs came from. So they decided to make a mandatory drug-testing rule. The school board had a meeting with parents and staff a proposed Student Athlete Drug Policy. The parents voted for the policy unanimously. The policy applied to all interscholastic athletes. Students wishing to join were forced to sign...

Words: 1144 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Ap U.S History

... A.P US History Court Cases I. Marbury v. Madison a) Issue: i) Judicial v. Executive and Congressional Power ii) Judicial review/separation of powers b) Background: i) 1803 ii) In his last few hours in office, President John Adams made a series of “midnight appointments” to fill as many government posts as possible with Federalists. One of these appointments was William Marbury as a federal justice of the peace. However, Thomas Jefferson took over as President before the appointment was officially given to Marbury. Jefferson, a Republican, instructed Secretary of State James Madison to not deliver the appointment. Marbury sued Madison to get the appointment he felt he deserved. He asked the Court to issue a writ of mandamus, requiring Madison to deliver the appointment. The Judiciary Act, passed by Congress in 1789, permitted the Supreme Court of the United States to issue such a writ iii) Supreme Court must decide constitutionality of Judiciary Act c) Decision: i) John Marshall declares Judiciary Act unconstitutional ii) The Supreme Court has the right of judiciary review d) Significance: i) Impact of Marshall Court ii) Strengthened the judiciary in relation to other branches of government iii) Allows Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and declare laws unconstitutional II. McCulloch v. Maryland a) Issue: i) Supremacy v. State Rights ii) Elastic Clause ...

Words: 5543 - Pages: 23

Premium Essay

Businesesea a S Ddf Sdf Dsf a Df S

...Supreme Court of the United States David Leon RILEY, Petitioner v. CALIFORNIA. United States, Petitioner v. Brima Wurie. Nos. 13–132, 13–212. Argued April 29, 2014. Decided June 25, 2014. Background: In two cases consolidated for appeal, first defendant was convicted by a jury in the Superior Court, San Diego County, Laura W. Halgren, J., of various crimes related to drive-by shooting, and he appealed based on his challenge to evidence found during police officers' warrantless search of data stored on his cell phone. The California Court of Appeal, 2013 WL 475242,[->0] affirmed. Second defendant was charged with drug- and weapon-related crimes, and the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Stearns, J., 612 F.Supp.2d 104,[->1] denied his motion to suppress evidence found during warrantless search of data stored on his cell phone, and defendant appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Stahl, Circuit Judge, 728 F.3d 1,[->2] reversed. Certiorari was granted. Holdings: The Supreme Court, Chief Justice Roberts[->3], held that: (1) interest in protecting officers' safety did not justify dispensing with warrant requirement for searches of cell phone data, and (2) interest in preventing destruction of evidence did not justify dispensing with warrant requirement for searches of cell phone data. Judgment of California Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, and judgment of First Circuit affirmed. Justice Alito...

Words: 24946 - Pages: 100